7
7 Ecosystem level assessment Current Method Determine the NOEC (or EC50) for each species representing an ecosystem Find the smallest NOEC (or EC50) Divide it by 10, 100, or 1000 (uncertainty factor) Regulate from this value or argue against it

8
8 Collect a consistent measure of toxicity from a representative set of species –EC50s or NOECs (not both) Fit a distribution (SSD) to these numerical measures Estimate concentration, HC5, that protects 95% of species in ecosystem Advantages and problems with SSDs Ecosystem level assessment Probabilistic Approach

10
10 SSD by Habitat Visual groupings are not taxonomic classes but defined by habitat, possibly related to mode of action Selection of Toxicity Data

11
11 How Many Species? Newmans method: 40 to 60 species –Snowballs chance… –Might reduce this by good choice of groups to model Aldenberg-Jaworski: 1 species will do –If you make enough assumptions,… 8 is usual target 5 is common 20-25 in some non-target plant studies

15
15 Which Laboratory Species? One EUFRAM case study fits an SSD to the following Aquatic toxicologists can comment (and have) on whether these values belong to a meaningful population

16
16 Variability and Uncertainty Uncertainty reflects lack of knowledge of the system under study Ex1: what distribution to fit for SSD Ex2: what mathematical model to use to estimate ECx Increased knowledge will reduce uncertainty Variability reflects lack of control inherent variation or noise among individuals. Increased knowledge of the animal or plant species will not reduce variability

17
17 Variability & Uncertainty The fitted distribution is assumed log-normal –Defined by the population mean and variance Motivated in part by standard relationship shown below –Randomly sample from the χ 2 (n-1) distribution. –Then randomly sample from a normal with the above variance, and mean equal to sample mean –Note: If formulas below are used, only variability is captured

18
18 Spaghetti plot Probabilities (vertical variable values) associated with a given value of log(EC50) are themselves distributed For a given log(EC50) value, the middle 95% of these secondary probabilities defines 95% confidence interval for proportion of species affected at that conc

19
19 For a given proportion (value of y), the values of Log(EC50) (horizontal variable) that might have produced the given y-value are distributed. For a given y value, the middle 95% of these x-values defines 95% confidence bounds on the distribution of log(ECy) values.

21
21 Putting it All Together Joint Probability Curves Plot exposure and toxicity distributions together to understand the likelihood of the exposure concentration exceeding the toxic threshold of a given percent of the population

22
22 Calculating Risk The risk is given by Pr[X e >X s ] where X e = exposure, X s =sensitivity or toxicity This is an average probability that exposure will exceed the sensitivity of species exposed Not clear that this captures the right risk Work needed here

23
23 Conclusions PRA can bring increased reality to risk management by –communicating uncertainty more realistically –separating uncertainty from variability –clarifying risk of environmental effects PRA is only as good as the assumptions and theories on which it rests The bad news is that implementation is running ahead of understanding

24
24 Conclusions SSDs based on tiny datasets unreliable Need to identify what populations are appropriate subjects for SSD is vital 2-D Monte Carlo methods often assume independent inputs or specific correlations –Not realistic in many cases PBA can accommodate dependent inputs –But can lead to wide bounds –Have other limitations restricting use MCMC can accommodate correlated inputs –But are mathematically demanding